I have a digital rebel xt so it has a 1.6 multiplier which bumps my 50 to 80 which is right in "ideal" portrait range. the 50 is also substantially less then the 85 1.2, any opinions on this? I'm not a professional, just looking to start out doing some studio lighting practice and feel my 70-200 is a bit too much to be shooting portraits with.

It depends upon your shooting style, but for me the critical difference may be in DOF. I like to manage (or limit) DOF carefully, and the 85 looks more promising in that regard. We're shooting Nikon with D2X bodies, and most of the time we use their 35-70mm f/2.8. It spends most of its life at the 70mm end, but the zoom is handy when accomodating small spaces or groups. That might be the circumstance for you as well, so don't discount the potential service from a high-end zoom shorter than your 70-200.

I have a digital rebel xt so it has a 1.6 multiplier which bumps my 50 to 80 which is right in "ideal" portrait range. the 50 is also substantially less then the 85 1.2, any opinions on this? I'm not a professional, just looking to start out doing some studio lighting practice and feel my 70-200 is a bit too much to be shooting portraits with.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55755\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There is also an 85 1.8 available, for about quarter of the price of the 85 1.2L The cheaper lens is actually much faster focusing and obviously significantly lighter. Quality is supposed to be good for both lenses (though better with the 1.2L) Depends ifyou need to focus speed and lighter lens, or not.

go for the 50mm f/1.8, all the way. it's a relatively cheap lens, and the photo quality (bokeh and sharpness) is very similar to the far more expensive 50mm f/1.4. one of the first photos i ever took with it was a portrait shot, and i was impressed with the quality of the lens. some might argue that the build quality (some sort of hard plastic) isn't great, but i don't really imagine it as a problem... unless you plan on abusing your lenses

I have a digital rebel xt so it has a 1.6 multiplier which bumps my 50 to 80 which is right in "ideal" portrait range. the 50 is also substantially less then the 85 1.2, any opinions on this? I'm not a professional, just looking to start out doing some studio lighting practice and feel my 70-200 is a bit too much to be shooting portraits with.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=55755\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

When you are looking at the sensor crop factor, the 50mm lens becomes a longer focal length, but the perspective you get with a longer focal length that makes it a portrait lens does not change. You wll not get the same "flattened" perspective when you use a normal lens on a APC sensor anymore than when you use it on a full frame sensor. The fact that you are shooting from a further distance for the same crop will help a little.